Page 3968 - Week 13 - Thursday, 17 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Detail Stage
Clauses 1 to 12, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.
Clause 13
MR STEFANIAK (4.44): I move:
Page 5, line 18, paragraph 13(1)(m), omit the paragraph.
Paragraph (m), as it stood, deemed that the community advocate had amongst his or her functions that of acting as subscribed representative under section 22 or 31 of the Mental Health Act 1983. Our concern in relation to that was that this presupposes, indeed assumes, that the community advocate would be taking on mental health functions. It is my understanding, and I think the understanding of the Assembly too, that the Government has not responded yet to the "Balancing Rights" report. Until such time as it does, mental health is really left there as a holding measure; it has not been decided by the Legislative Assembly as yet. That report has not been debated and concluded.
Part of that report, I think, dealt with the suggestion of having a mental health advocate, and the Assembly does need to consider whether, in fact, there needs to be a mental health advocate now. Until such time as it does, I think that particular paragraph is premature. It might well be that at some time in the not too distant future it may be deemed appropriate to reinsert that paragraph; but, at present, I think we would be jumping the gun. Accordingly, I seek to have that paragraph deleted.
MR COLLAERY (4.46): Madam Temporary Deputy Speaker, this amendment seeks to remove a provision that goes to the core of the function. The objection that, as I gather it, the community groups have had is that they believe that this puts too much onto the function. I believe that we should be ambitious, where we can, and not regard this role as necessarily, in terms of the legislation, limited by our restricted funds. Unless the Attorney, on the advice available to him, wishes to agree to this, my view is that we should support the broader, more ambitious function and retain the paragraph. I believe that Mr Stefaniak has the right to speak twice to this, and I would like him to clarify a little more what he is seeking.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (4.47): The original intention of the Government in having this provision in the package was really as protection against the time, in the future, when the Government and this Assembly have the opportunity to implement the "Balancing Rights" report. It is clear that mental health law and practice in this Territory does have a long way to go.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .